A colony for 50 years, federated , Unified to Ethiopia , in 1991's seceded after three decades of rebellion. Since 1998 Eritrea is at War, harboring proxy warriors especially the notorious Al- Shabab. Torture ,imprisonment , thousands fleeing, no religious freedom , the only university is closed, everybody is in the army, No Parliament, No election, No functioning institution, No free press & all living journalists are in prison. Eritrea is called the North Korea of Africa.

Heads of overseas missions of Ethiopia across the world appear to be in a hushed competition to mobilize as many resources in the form of bonds to support the Great Renaissance Dam, as they can get, gossip observed. Neither is the pressure from Menelik II Avenue easy on them.
For instance, the mission in Canada raised a little over 24,000 dollars a few months ago. Pro-government websites are now busy promoting a series of dinners and fund raising events in western cities in their bid to support what is known as the “Hidase Bond”.
Senior diplomats assigned to western capitals were told in no uncertain terms that their career path depended on how much they succeed in mobilizing the largest resources possible from members of the Diaspora, claims gossip. Recently the mission in Washington D.C., under the once influential cabinet minister relegated to become special envoy for the Prime Minister to the United States, had proudly declared to have sold bonds worth half a million dollars, if it was not to get rebuffed by Addis Abeba that it was not nearly enough, gossip claims.
Add to this the pressure they were put into the past few months lobbying their respective host countries in Addis Abeba’s bid to win a diplomatic battle against the arch foe in Asmara, according to gossip.
The regime in Asmara, pronounced by Ethiopia’s Prime Minister as a bunch who are unable to evolve from their guerilla syndrome, has had too many enemies around the region. Literally, no country in the sub-region likes or trusts the man in Asmara. Even the Sudanese, whose forerunners in the 1980s did everything they could to support his cause, are not on the same page with Issayas Afeworki.
Yet, the resolution to punish his often unpredictable, rogue behavior was sponsored by unlikely countries; Gabon and Nigeria. And it has always been clear who, among the powerful members of the Security Council at the UN, is behind pushing for sanctions.
Monsieur Issayas had to face the wrath of Addis Abeba and Washington D.C. after an allegation by the first was confirmed by the UN monitoring group that his regime was behind a foiled attempt to attack Addis Abeba during an AU Summit back in 2010. Ironically, Russian Ambassador to the UN, V. Churkin, one of the two to abstain during the vote, argued the evidence was not “sufficient or available” for his review. So did Chinese Ambassador to the UN, Li Baodong, abstain, upholding his country’s long-held views on sanctions that they have never worked.
Surprisingly, South Africa, one of four countries in Sub-Saharan Africa whose leaders appear to be locked in a global diplomatic hype contest with Meles Zenawi, was recorded as one of the 13 countries who voted last Tuesday, December 6, 2011, in favour of sanctions. Nonetheless, its Ambassador in New York, Doctor Mashabane, felt the evidence Addis Abeba produced was “inconclusive”.
Despite the declaration of victory which Susan Rice of the US claimed as a clear message to Asmara, Addis Abeba is most unhappy, gossip learnt. In effect, there has been no new sanctions imposed on Eritrea, except for beefing up the list of names of Eritrean authorities who are banned from traveling overseas and whose foreign accounts have been frozen. Yet another assignment given to the monitory group is to come up with a new list of names to be included.
It is indeed a far cry from what Tekeda Alemu (PhD), Ethiopia’s envoy to the US, and his bosses on the Menelik II Avenue, have been pushing for: hitting Issayas where it hurts by imposing sanctions on foreign firms which invest in the Eritrean mining sector (which is to mean gold) and on money sent by Eritreans in the Diaspora for their families, which revenues Ambassador Rice described as “extortion”.
Nonetheless, diplomats in Addis Abeba have been advised to put on a brave face and refrain from speaking in any manner of dissatisfaction against last week’s resolution, gossip claims. Brehane G. Kirstos, state minister for Foreign Affairs, did just that one day after the resolution, appearing on national television. This does not mean that he was not without disappointment over the extremely watered-down resolution, gossip revealed.

Very furious, indeed! And ironically the scene would have put a little smile on the faces of the thousands of incommunicado Eritrean political and religious prisoners who unfortunately are not able to read or hear about it. Nor is the state media, which is the only source of information in the country, telling the rest of the citizenry the truth of why the UN was obliged to take additional punitive measures on the Isaias regime.

But 170 miles south of Addis Ababa, in the colorful Ethiopian Rift Valley City of Hawassa, 600 pro-democracy Eritrean activists who came together from all over the world for a National Congress in November received the news of the new corrective UN sanctions with jubilation hailing it as a major victory for the oppressed Eritrean people. Many of these activists were comrades-in-arms with many members of the ruling Ethiopian EPRDF in their common struggle against former Mengistu’s autocratic rule and now against despotism in Eritrea.

The reaction of the Eritrean government to the second round of UN sanctions was predictable. Although the facts of the case and the charges were researched and prepared by its aggrieved neighbors - Djibouti, Somalia, Ethiopia, Kenya and Uganda - in collaboration with a UN sanctions monitoring group, an Eritrean Foreign Ministry statement alleges that the sanctions are “the result of undisguised United States hostility towards Eritrea.” The government which routinely trashes the concept of legal justice and has long banned the study of jurisprudence from its colleges, speaks of the sanctions as being “illegal and unjust”. The regime would be credible in the eyes of its own people if the tens of thousands of prisoners - journalists, religious leaders, and cabinet ministers, among others - rotting and dying in torture chambers were allowed to seek legal justice in court in which they can defend themselves.

Tragic domestic problems aside, East African governments wanted tougher sanctions levied on Eritrea hoping these might lead to peace in their region. The US also stands to gain by helping to pacify Somalia which has harbored terrorists responsible for the bombings of its two embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 killing and maiming hundreds of staff members and bystanders.

Inside Somalia tens of thousands of innocents have perished as a result of alleged Eritrea’s involvement in the country’s ‘civil war’ in which Asmara is said to have provided Al-Qaeda linked Shabab with weapons, finances and other forms of vital support. Somalia’s President Sheriff Sheikh Ahmed lamented that the regime in Eritrea was “terrorizing his people”. Even an attempt by the late Col Moamar Gaddafi to stop Eritrea’s Isaias Afewerki from destabilizing Somalia failed, according to Sheikh Ahmed’s impassioned testimony before the Security Council via video link.

Ethiopian Premier Meles Zenawi attributes Eritrea’s reported subversive activities in the region on a “certain clique in Asmara that has never grown up” ostensibly from the time of the liberation struggle decades ago.

Kenya, which has now joined the African war in Somalia on the side of the government there, says it won’t sever ties with Eritrea over Al Shabab. But the Kenyan Ambassador to the UN, Macharia Kamau, urges Eritrea to respond to the UN concerns if it “wishes to remain part of the community of nations in our part of the world.”

The main charges are that Eritrea is stirring up bloody conflicts in the Horn of Africa by providing arms and funds to Al Shabab and other rebel forces in the region and that it attempted to carry out a terrorist attack on the African Union summit in Addis Ababa in January. The Eritrean government has denied the charges although it did not seem to present convincing counter evidence to refute them. This is a job for legal experts and Isaias Afewerki making a concluding statement in defense of his government before the Security Council would have swayed no minds even that of sympathetic Russia.

Three main reasons why Eritrea is outraged

One: In what is viewed by some observers as an Eritrea-Ethiopia proxy war in Somalia, Eritrea is incensed and infuriated by the increasing diplomatic successes and internationally supported Somalia-policy of Ethiopia, a country which Eritrea has long wanted punished by the UN for not pulling out of the village of Badme on their common border in accordance with a UN decision. Undermining Ethiopia seems to have been the basis for Eritrea’s domestic and foreign policies. The issue of “Badme” is the reason Eritrea has refused to consider the people’s demands for human rights, democracy and elections, and why hundreds of thousands of its youth are still in the trenches without pay depriving the nation of vital labor force. Some experts say the same motive has forced the government to align itself with Islamist militant groups such as Al Shabab in order to weaken Ethiopia. The Eritrean government is far from reaching its goals and without an urgent change of policy it may not be too long before it is slapped again with a third round of UN sanctions or worse.

Two: The new sanctions are more intrusive. They put Eritrea’s revenues from mining and Diaspora taxes under strict scrutiny by UN member states and by the UN Sanctions Monitoring Group. UN member states have the obligation to ensure that funds generated from these two sources are not used by the Eritrean government for terrorism or destabilization purposes in the Horn. The government never discloses its revenues or their sources and is not guided by any accountability rules. It should now be easier to find out how much money the nation has earned, when, where and how it is being spent. If the government fails to achieve the following, i.e., end slave labor, build affordable housing, start rehabilitating conscripts who have served more than three years, reopen the Asmara University and build new ones, increase national food rationing three fold, then it probably is spending the national income of close to a billion US dollars in purchasing such weapons as missiles, new fighter planes or is trying to build, God forbid, WMDs or the Eritrean leaders are stashing the funds in secret banks around the world or they are still financing rebel groups and extremists.

Three: The price for noncompliance has gone up with the new sanctions. Asset freezes and travel bans will now hit more of Isaias’s generals, cabinet members and advisors. Most of them are western oriented with relatives and friends abroad. If they see no end in sight for the country’s dilemma, they might start pointing fingers at Isaias and at each other - a good enough reason for Isaias to be worried.

Undoubtedly UN member states appreciate the correlation between the atrocities committed against Eritreans at home and their government’s readiness to commit acts of aggression abroad. The Executive Chairman of the newly established 127-member Eritrean National Assembly in exile, Dr. Yosuf Berhanu, M.D., asks if the world ever “expected internally despotic Eritrea to be peace-loving and democratic externally”. If this is the case, no amount of sanctions will transform or change the Eritrean regime. In fact, the sanctions are another opportunity for it to divert attention from the urgent national need to build liberty and democracy now.

The international community has not been able to work with the Isaias administration on any relevant issues. This may be the time for the UN and AU and other bodies to recognize and to try to cooperate with the leaders of the new Eritrean National Assembly for Democratic Change which is made up of practically all democratic civil society organizations, political parties, women and youth from Eritrean communities across the world.

Thursday, December 15, 2011

Netanyahu Plans Africa Trip

December 14, 2011

Jerusalem (JTA) -- Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he will visit Africa as part of Israel's efforts to repatriate illegal migrants from Sudan and Eritrea.
Netanyahu announced the trip, for which a schedule has yet to be given, during a Cabinet discussion Sunday about the influx to Israel of African migrants who cross the porous border with the Egyptian Sinai.
"I intend to travel to Africa and to speak and advance arrangements for the return of these refugees from Africa," he said.
Netanyahu did not cite specific venues, but Israel has been in contact with South Sudan since the African country was formed this year. Israel has no ties with Sudan, a hostile Muslim nation.
In addition to Juba, Netanyahu could have the option of visiting Asmara, the capital of Eritrea, with which Israel has relations.
The Jewish state sees a demographic and economic threat in the tens of thousands of African migrants who have reached its territory in recent years. Though some are regarded as war refugees, Israel says most come seeking work.
Netanyahu noted Israel's plan to complete a fence along the Egyptian frontier within a year and said his government would also increase fines on employers who hire the border jumpers.
According to Netanyahu's office, there are currently 52,487 illegal migrants who came to Israel seeking work, and their annual arrival rate has surged to 30,000.
"Without a plan to tackle the illegal work infiltrators, we will arrive at 100,000 infiltrators a year," said Netanyahu.

Wednesday, December 7, 2011

Melese Zenawie succeeded to put Eritrea in Quarantaine after long conflict and consecutive proxy wars. Eritrea today stands accused of helping Al Shebab and other armed group against the IGAD states in the Horn of Africa. The two frères enemy Eritrea and Ethiopian leader have extended their conflict to the neighboring countries after two years of sever conflict in 1998-2000. The UN endorsed the version of Melese Zenawie on the 5 of December by putting the poorest all the Horn of African countries in strict sanction.

Security Council expands sanctions on Eritrea over support for armed groups

Security Council in session

5 December 2011 –

The Security Council today placed additional sanctions on Eritrea for continuing to provide support to armed groups seeking to destabilize Somalia and other parts of the Horn of Africa, building on the arms and travel embargoes it imposed exactly two years ago.The new measures are contained in a resolution which received the support of 13 of the Council’s 15 members. China and Russia abstained. It follows an earlier meeting today at which the Council heard a briefing from the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD).
The Council expressed its grave concern in the text that “Eritrea has continued to provide political, financial, training and logistical support to armed opposition groups, including Al-Shabaab, engaged in undermining peace, security and stability in Somalia and the region.”It also condemned the planned terrorist attack of January 2011 to disrupt the African Union summit in Addis Ababa, as expressed by the findings of the Somalia/Eritrea Monitoring Group in July.
It also condemned the planned terrorist attack of January 2011 to disrupt the African Union summit in Addis Ababa, as expressed by the findings of the Somalia/Eritrea Monitoring Group in July.
The group found that the Eritrean Government “conceived, planned, organized and directed a failed plot” to disrupt the summit by bombing a series of civilian and governmental targets.
In December 2009, the Council adopted a resolution which imposed sanctions on Eritrea for supporting insurgents trying to topple the government in nearby Somalia. The measures included an arms embargo on Eritrea, travel bans on the country’s top political and military officials, and the freezing of assets of some of its senior political and military officials.
By today’s text, which was sponsored by Gabon and Nigeria, the Council condemned Eritrea’s violations of earlier resolutions.
It demanded that it “cease all direct or indirect efforts to destabilize States,” including through financial, military, intelligence and non-military assistance, such as the provision of training centres and camps for armed groups, passports, living expenses, or travel facilitation.
The Council also voiced concern at the potential use of the Eritrean mining sector as a source of finance to destabilize the Horn of Africa. It decided that States should take measures to ensure that their companies involved in mining in Eritrea exercise “due diligence” so that funds derived from the sector are not used to destabilize the region.
In addition, the Council called on Eritrea to engage constructively with Djibouti to resolve their border dispute.

UNITED NATIONS - The U.N. Security Council responded to appeals from east African leaders on Monday and approved tighter sanctions on Eritrea, which is accused of funding and arming terrorist groups in the volatile region.

The resolution was approved by a vote of 13-0, with Russia and China abstaining. Both countries are traditionally reluctant to impose sanctions.

Earlier on Monday, the leaders of Djibouti, Ethiopia and Somalia, along with senior officials from Kenya and Uganda, addressed the council by video conference from Addis Ababa and urged members to adopt a resolution strengthening sanctions imposed in 2009.

The resolution condemned Eritrea for violating the sanctions, which include an arms embargo, by continuing to support the Somali militant group al-Shabab and other opposition fighters. It demands that the government stop assisting armed groups trying to destabilize other countries in the region.

It called on all countries to exercise "vigilance" to prevent any diversions of funds from Eritrea's mining sector — a key source of income — to destabilize the Horn of Africa region in violation of sanctions.

It also condemned the "diaspora tax" that the Eritrean government imposes on remittances from its nationals overseas and allegedly uses to fund armed opposition groups.

Eritrean President Isaias Afwerki had asked to address the council in October, when a draft resolution was first circulated by Gabon and Nigeria. The draft was watered down, and the council didn't issue an invitation to Isaias to come to New York until late last week, when it scheduled a vote on the revised resolution for Monday afternoon.

In two letters to the Security Council this weekend, Eritrea's Foreign Minister Osman Saleh said it was not "humanly possible" for the president to get to New York so quickly, and he accused members of rushing a vote. He blamed the United States for obstructing Isaias' initial request to address the council, which prevented him from having any influence on deliberations on the text.

U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice said the Eritreans applied on Friday morning for 13 visas to come to the U.S. and that they were granted Saturday morning.

"They had ample time to be here," she said. "We have no explanation for their not being here except that they perhaps didn't like what was going to happen today."

U.N. experts monitoring the sanctions reported in July that Eritrea was continuing to provide support to al-Shabab — a view echoed by Somalia's President Sheik Sharif Sheik Ahmed.

"The regime in Eritrea insists on terrorizing my people," he told the council, accusing the Eritrean government of giving political, logistical and financial support to al-Shabab and al Qaeda militants.

The U.N. experts also blamed Eritrea for January's planned terrorist attack on the African Union summit in Addis Ababa, which Monday's resolution condemned.

The Inter Governmental Authority for Development, known as IGAD, which groups seven East African countries, had called in July for more sanctions to hit the Eritrean mining sector and remittances.

But council diplomats said new sanctions were watered down because of opposition from Russia and China as well as some European countries and the U.S., which felt the measures could hurt the Eritrean people.

Ethiopia's Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, whose country has a border dispute with Eritrea, insisted that "this is not a family quarrel" between the two countries, but an attempt to address the fact that "Eritrea is a prime source of instability for the whole region."

Meles, who heads IGAD, said he was "personally disappointed that much of the teeth of this resolution has been removed" but he said the current text still sends a message that Eritrea cannot continue to destabilize the region without consequences.
---------

REGIME AGAINST ERITREA ‘CALIBRATED’ TO HALT ALL ACTIVITIES DESTABILIZING REGION

Concerned at the potential use of the Eritrean mining sector as a financial source to destabilize the Horn of Africa region, the Security Council today reinforced the sanctions regime on that country to prevent mining funds from contributing to its continued violations of those measures.

Adopting resolution 2023 (2011), under Chapter VII of the Charter, by a vote of 13 in favour to none against, with 2 abstentions (China, Russian Federation), the Council demanded that Eritrea cease all direct or indirect efforts to destabilize States, and decided that States shall “undertake appropriate measures to promote the exercise of vigilance” in business dealings with Eritrea’s mining sector. To that end, it requested its Sanctions Committee concerning Somalia and Eritrea to draft, with the assistance of the Somalia/Eritrea Monitoring Group, due diligence guidelines for States’ optional use.

The Council also condemned Eritrea’s use of the “diaspora tax” on the Eritrean diaspora to destabilize the Horn of Africa region and to violate the sanctions regime, including by procuring arms and related materiel for transfer to armed opposition groups, and decided that Eritrea shall cease those practices. It further decided that Eritrea shall stop using extortion, threats of violence, fraud and other illicit means to collect taxes outside of Eritrea from its nationals or other individuals of Eritrean descent.

By further terms of the text, the Council expressed its intention to apply targeted sanctions against individuals and entities that meet the listing criteria set out in paragraph 15 of resolution 1907 (2009) and paragraph 1 of resolution 2002 (2011). [Together, those resolutions imposed an arms embargo, as well as a travel ban and assets freeze on Eritrea’s political and military leaders, and expanded the sanctions regime to include individuals and entities recruiting or using child soldiers in Somalia’s armed conflicts, and targeting civilians or committing attacks against schools and hospitals.]

By today’s text, the Council also decided to expand the mandate of the Monitoring Group to monitor and report on the provisions of the new text, as well as its demand that Eritrea make available information regarding the Djiboutian combatants missing in action since 10 to 12 June 2008.

It called on all States to report within 120 days on steps taken to implement the current resolution and on the Secretary-General to report within 180 days on Eritrea’s compliance under the sanctions regime. It affirmed that it would keep Eritrea’s actions under continuous review and that it was prepared to strengthen, modify or lift those sanctions based on the country’s compliance.

Speaking as Chair of the Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD) by videoconference from Addis Ababa, hours before the Council took action, MelesZenawi, Prime Minister of Ethiopia, said the member States of IGAD had gathered to express the same opinion, namely that “Eritrea is a prime source of instability for the whole region”. IGAD had been actively involved in drafting the text, which was tabled by Gabon and Nigeria, he said, and a failure by the Council to adopt it would imply that the countries in the region were on their own, and must defend themselves. That was not a choice they wished to make. “We ask you to act, and to act decisively,” he stressed.

Also speaking before action this afternoon, Gabon’s representative said that in response to the urgent appeal by IGAD for new sanctions, his country had felt it was necessary to co-sponsor the resolution. Despite appeals by the international community and the African Union, Eritrea had failed to comply with relevant Security Council resolutions. Urging the text’s adoption, he said it aimed to lead to peace and security in the region.

Nigeria’s representative, speaking after the text’s adoption, said that beyond any sanctions, the opportunity for a political solution to regional challenges should not be closed. A comprehensive and lasting peace must be the goal, and he encouraged Eritrea to comply with all of the resolution’s provisions. Just as the future of the region depended on political will, international support was also needed.

Explaining his delegation’s abstention, the representative of the Russian Federation said that although his Government understood the many concerns expressed by IGAD member States and was categorically opposed to terrorism, it believed the Council had not been presented with proof of the perpetrators of a reported attack on the African Union summit. Moreover, the Russian Federation opposed the inclusion in the resolution of the issue of the diaspora, as well as of phrases that could have double meanings. Diplomatic work, along with broad and multifaceted dialogue, was needed to establish peace in the region, and he called on all parties there to conduct such a dialogue to advance a settlement.

While China had actively participated in drafting the current resolution, that country’s ambassador said it had abstained in the vote based on its view that sanctions could affect people’s livelihoods and its assessment that the rush to vote on the text had resulted in its ultimate failure to reflect the legitimate concerns of Council members.

Germany’s ambassador stressed, however, that the Council and the Sanctions Committee had discussed at length and in depth the scope of a reinforced sanctions regime. The present text was calibrated and did not impose new economic sanctions. Nor did it increase the burden on the Eritrean people. It demanded further transparency from Eritrea, which must stop all activities that destabilized the region.

Stressing that the Monitoring Group had provided evidence of the “appalling” planned attack on the African Union summit, the representative of the United States said the resolution provided further opportunity for Eritrea to show its good faith. Indeed, Eritrea must confirm through its actions that it was ready to re-emerge as a law-abiding State, and the United States hoped Eritrea would not squander that chance.

Also speaking were the representatives of the United Kingdom, South Africa, Lebanon and France.

Also addressing the Council via video- and teleconference were Ismaël Omar Guelleh, President of Djibouti; Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed, President of the Transitional Federal Government of Somalia; Moses Wetangula, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Kenya; and Mull SebujjaKatende, Ambassador of Uganda to the African Union.

The meeting began at 10:10 a.m. and was suspended at 10:45 a.m., reconvening at 3:07 p.m. before concluding at 3:41 p.m.

Resolution

The full text of resolution 2023 (2011) reads as follows:

“The Security Council,

“Recalling its previous resolutions and statements of its President concerning the situation in Somalia and the border dispute between Djibouti and Eritrea, in particular its resolutions 751 (1992), 1844 (2008), 1862 (2009), 1907 (2009), 1916 (2009), 1998 (2011) and 2002 (2011), and its statements of 18 May 2009 (S/PRST/2009/15), 9 July 2009 (S/PRST/2009/19), and 12 June 2008 (S/PRST/2008/20),

“Reaffirming its respect for the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence and unity of Somalia, Djibouti and Eritrea, respectively, as well as that of all other States of the region,

“Reiterating its full support for the Djibouti Peace Process and the Transitional Federal Charter which provide the framework for reaching a lasting political solution in Somalia, and welcoming the Kampala Accord of 9 June 2011 and the road map agreed on 6 September 2011,

“Calling upon all States in the region to peacefully resolve their disputes and normalize their relations in order to lay the foundation for durable peace and lasting security in the Horn of Africa, and encouraging these States to provide the necessary cooperation to the African Union in its efforts to resolve these disputes,

“Reiterating its grave concern about the border dispute between Eritrea and Djibouti and the importance of resolving it, calling upon Eritrea to pursue with Djibouti, in good faith, the scrupulous implementation of the 6 June 2010 Agreement, concluded under the auspices of Qatar, in order to resolve their border dispute and consolidate the normalization of their relations, andwelcoming the mediation efforts of Qatar, and the continued engagement of regional actors, the African Union, and the United Nations,

“Noting the letter of the Permanent Representative of Djibouti to the United Nations of 6 October 2011 (S/2011/617) which informs the Secretary-General of the escape of two Djiboutian prisoners of war from an Eritrean prison, while noting that the Government of Eritrea has to this date denied detaining any Djiboutian prisoners of war,

“Expressing grave concern at the findings of the Somalia/Eritrea Monitoring Group report of 18 July 2011 (S/2011/433), that Eritrea has continued providing political, financial, training and logistical support to armed opposition groups, including Al-Shabaab, engaged in undermining peace, security and stability in Somalia and the region,

“Condemning the planned terrorist attack of January 2011 to disrupt the African Union summit in Addis Ababa, as expressed by the findings of the Somalia/Eritrea Monitoring Group report,

“Taking note of the Decision of the African Union Assembly of Heads of State and Government held in January 2010 and the Communiqué of the AU Peace and Security Council held on 8 January 2010, welcoming the adoption, by the United Nations (UN) Security Council on 23 December 2009 of resolution 1907 (2009), which imposes sanctions on Eritrea, for, among other things, providing political, financial and logistical support to armed groups engaged in undermining peace and reconciliation in Somalia and regional stability; stressing the need to pursue vigorously the effective implementation of resolution 1907 (2009), and expressing its intention to apply targeted sanctions against individuals and entities if they meet the listing criteria set out in paragraph 15 of resolution 1907 (2009) and paragraph 8 of resolution 1844 (2008),

“Noting the decision by the 18th Extraordinary Session of the Assembly of the Heads of State and Government of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), calling on the Security Council to take measures to ensure that Eritrea desists from its destabilization activities in the Horn of Africa,

“Noting the letter from Eritrea (S/2011/652), containing a document responding to the report of Somalia/Eritrea Monitoring Group,

“Strongly condemning any acts by Eritrea that undermine peace, security and stability in the region and calling on all Member States to comply fully with the terms of the arms embargo imposed by paragraph 5 of resolution 733 (1992), as elaborated and amended by subsequent resolutions,

“Determining that Eritrea’s failure to fully comply with resolutions 1844 (2008), 1862 (2009) and 1907 (2009) and its actions undermining peace and reconciliation in Somalia and the Horn of Africa region, as well as the dispute between Djibouti and Eritrea constitute a threat to international peace and security,

“Mindful of its primary responsibility under the Charter of the United Nations for the maintenance of international peace and security,

“Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,

“1. Condemns the violations by Eritrea of Security Council resolutions 1907 (2009), 1862 (2009) and 1844 (2008) by providing continued support to armed opposition groups, including Al-Shabaab, engaged in undermining peace and reconciliation in Somalia and the region;

“2. Supports the call by the African Union for Eritrea to resolve its border disputes with its neighbours and calls on the parties to peacefully resolve their disputes, normalize their relations and to promote durable peace and lasting security in the Horn of Africa, and encourages the parties to provide the necessary cooperation to the African Union in its efforts to resolve these disputes;

“3. Reiterates that all Member States, including Eritrea, shall comply fully with the terms of the arms embargo imposed by paragraph 5 of resolution 733 (1992), as elaborated and amended by subsequent resolutions;

“4. Reiterates that Eritrea shall fully comply with resolution 1907 (2009) without any further delay and stresses the obligation of all States to comply with the measures imposed by resolution 1907 (2009);

“5. Notes Eritrea’s withdrawal of its forces following the stationing of Qatari observers in the disputed areas along the border with Djibouti, calls upon Eritrea to engage constructively with Djibouti to resolve the border dispute, and reaffirms its intention to take further targeted measures against those who obstruct implementation of resolution 1862 (2009);

“6. Demands that Eritrea shall make available information pertaining to Djiboutian combatants missing in action since the clashes of 10 to 12 June 2008 so that those concerned may ascertain the presence and condition of Djiboutian prisoners of war;

“7. Demands Eritrea to cease all direct or indirect efforts to destabilize States, including through financial, military, intelligence and non-military assistance, such as the provision of training centres, camps and other similar facilities for armed groups, passports, living expenses, or travel facilitation;

“8. Calls upon all States, in particular States of the region, in order to ensure strict implementation of the arms embargo established by paragraphs 5 and 6 of resolution 1907 (2009), to inspect in their territory, including seaports and airports, in accordance with the national authorities and legislation and consistent with international law, all cargo bound to or from Eritrea, if the State concerned has information that provides reasonable grounds to believe that the cargo contains items the supply, sale, transfer or export of which is prohibited by paragraphs 5 or 6 of resolution 1907 (2009), and recalls the obligations contained in paragraphs 8 and 9 of resolution 1907 (2009) with respect to the discovery of items prohibited by paragraphs 5 or 6 of resolution 1907 (2009) and paragraph 5 of resolution 733 (1992) as elaborated and amended by subsequent resolutions;

“9. Expresses its intention to apply targeted sanctions against individuals and entities if they meet the listing criteria set out in paragraph 15 of resolution 1907 (2009) and paragraph 1 of resolution 2002 (2011) and requests the Committee to review, as a matter of urgency, listing proposals from Member States;

“10. Condemns the use of the ‘Diaspora tax’ on Eritrean diaspora by the Eritrean Government to destabilize the Horn of Africa region or violate relevant resolutions, including 1844 (2008), 1862 (2009) and 1907 (2009), including for purposes such as procuring arms and related materiel for transfer to armed opposition groups or providing any services or financial transfers provided directly or indirectly to such groups, as outlined in the findings of the Somalia/Eritrea Monitoring Group in its 18 July 2011 report (S/2011/433), and decides that Eritrea shall cease these practices;

“11. Decides that Eritrea shall cease using extortion, threats of violence, fraud and other illicit means to collect taxes outside of Eritrea from its nationals or other individuals of Eritrean descent, decides further that States shall undertake appropriate measures to hold accountable, consistent with international law, those individuals on their territory who are acting, officially or unofficially, on behalf of the Eritrean Government or the PFDJ contrary to the prohibitions imposed in this paragraph and the laws of the States concerned, and calls upon States to take such action as may be appropriate consistent with their domestic law and international relevant instruments, including the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, to prevent such individuals from facilitating further violations;

“12. Expresses concern at the potential use of the Eritrean mining sector as a financial source to destabilize the Horn of Africa region, as outlined in the Final Report of the Monitoring Group (S/2011/433), and calls on Eritrea to show transparency in its public finances, including through cooperation with the Monitoring Group, in order to demonstrate that the proceeds of these mining activities are not being used to violate relevant resolutions, including 1844 (2008), 1862 (2009), 1907 (2009) and this resolution;

“13. Decides that States, in order to prevent funds derived from the mining sector of Eritrea contributing to violations of resolutions 1844 (2008), 1862 (2009), 1907 (2009) or this resolution, shall undertake appropriate measures to promote the exercise of vigilance by their nationals, persons subject to their jurisdiction and firms incorporated in their territory or subject to their jurisdiction that are doing business in this sector in Eritrea including through the issuance of due diligence guidelines, and requests in this regard the Committee, with the assistance of the Monitoring Group, to draft guidelines for the optional use of Member States;

“14. Urges all States to introduce due diligence guidelines to prevent the provision of financial services, including insurance or re-insurance, or the transfer to, through, or from their territory, or to or by their nationals or entities organized under their laws (including branches abroad), or persons or financial institutions in their territory, of any financial or other assets or resources if such services, assets or resources, including new investment in the extractives sector, would contribute to Eritrea’s violation of relevant resolutions, including 1844 (2008), 1862 (2009), 1907 (2009) and this resolution;

“15. Calls upon all States to report to the Security Council within 120 days on steps taken to implement the provisions of this resolution;

“16. Decides to further expand the mandate of the Monitoring Group re‑established by resolution 2002 (2011) to monitor and report on implementation of the measures imposed in this resolution and undertake the tasks outlined below:

(a) Assist the Committee in monitoring the implementation of the measures imposed in paragraphs 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 above, including by reporting any information on violations;

(b) Consider any information relevant to paragraph 6 above that should be brought to the attention of the Committee;

“17. Urges all States, relevant United Nations bodies and other interested parties to cooperate fully with the Committee and the Monitoring Group, including by supplying any information at their disposal on the implementation of the measures decided in resolution 1844 (2008), resolution 1907 (2009) and this resolution, in particular incidents of non-compliance;

“18. Affirms that it shall keep Eritrea’s actions under continuous review and that it shall be prepared to adjust the measures, including through their strengthening, modification or lifting, in light of Eritrea’s compliance with the provisions of resolutions 1844 (2008), 1862 (2009), 1907 (2009) and this resolution;

“19. Requests the Secretary-General to report within 180 days on Eritrea’s compliance with the provisions of resolutions 1844 (2008), 1862 (2009), 1907 (2009) and this resolution;

“20. Decides to remain seized of the matter.”

Background

The Security Council met to consider peace and security in Africa, for which it was joined in the morning by a number of speakers via video- and teleconference.

Statements

ISMAËL OMAR GUELLEH, President of Djibouti, said that since the beginning of its aggressions against his country, Eritrea had long ignored efforts to resolve the dispute in a responsible manner. The people of Djibouti had welcomed the mediation accord signed in 2010 under the auspices of Qatar. But, unfortunately, the signing of that accord had not changed the views of Eritrea, which flagrantly continued its kidnapping and forced recruitment of young Djiboutians, who returned to the north to perpetrate terrorist attacks in Djibouti. His Government would never allow the Eritrean regime to carry out such attacks and, to that end, it had arrested rebels who were trained and sent by Eritrea to conduct such attacks. Weapons sent by the Eritrean regime had also been intercepted and that information had been conveyed to the Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD), as well as to the United Nations.

Continuing, he said that, despite article 3 of the mediation accord, which stipulated that all parties would make available information on the 19 disappeared soldiers being held in Eritrea, that country still had not done so. For its part, Djibouti had sought to meet the accord’s requirements by inviting the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to meet with deserted soldiers from Eritrea. Although two of the Djiboutian soldiers, who had been held since June 2008, had escaped from a detention camp in Eritrea, news of the other 17 soldiers was unavailable. He called for their immediate release without condition.

In addition to promoting regional instability, Eritrea threatened international peace and security, he stressed. Shirking sanctions, Eritrea had chosen to flout calls by the Council and regional organizations to change its behaviour. He called on Council members to support the resolution presented today on behalf of IGAD’s members. The present text was necessary because the previous resolutions and sanctions did not seem to contain Eritrea’s actions.

SHEIKH SHARIF SHEIKH AHMED, President of the Transitional Federal Government of Somalia, said his people had been suffering from terrorism. His Government had tried to reconcile with those groups, but interference by the Eritrean authorities had prevented that. Al‑Shabaab and Al-Qaida had the support of the Eritrean Government by sea, land and air. The Eritrean regime had the ability to deliver assistance to Al-Shabaab from Eritrea to Somalia.

He said that although Somalia had no direct borders with Eritrea or a history of bad relations, current circumstances had caused much suffering in his country from the actions of Al-Shabaab. He had tried to resolve problems with Eritrea, including with common friends, such as the late Muammar Qadhafi, who had called upon them to leave Somalia and reconcile. That proposition had been rejected. Mr. Ahmed said he had also attended a Sahel country meeting. Eritrea had not. He had called on Mr. Qadhafi to convince the Eritrean President not to intervene in Somalia. That request had also been rejected. Embassies in Kenya and elsewhere were aware of financial transactions and of military advisers being sent to Somalia to conduct training and attacking African Union forces.

The regime in Eritrea had insisted on terrorizing the Somali people, and diplomatic talks had been rejected, he said. While he truly regretted the plight of the Eritrean people, the interests of his country and his neighbours were being harmed. IGAD did not usually meet in the absence of a member State unless the situation was dire. It currently was.

MELESZENAWI, Prime Minister of Ethiopia, also speaking as Chair of the Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD), said that as a region, the countries addressing the Council today were not complaining about the domestic policies of the Eritrean Government. They might or might not like those policies, but that was a domestic matter. Nor was it a “family quarrel” between Ethiopia and Eritrea. All member States of IGAD had gathered to express the same opinion, namely that “Eritrea is a prime source of instability for the whole region”.

Of course, he said, Ethiopia also had a problem with Eritrea, which, according to the assessment of an independent panel, had started when Eritrea had invaded Ethiopia. Nevertheless, the 2002 delimitation decision had been accepted by Ethiopia without preconditions. His Government might not like the decision, but it had made clear that it accepted it unconditionally. The demarcation of boundaries on maps was a fiction, and Ethiopia was asking Eritrea to engage in dialogue in order to move towards demarcation, just as Nigeria and Cameroon had. “This is what grown-ups do,” he said.

He said Eritrea had invaded islands held by Yemen before it had invaded Ethiopia. It had also invaded Djibouti, first denying it had done so, and then admitting it had by withdrawing and allowing Qatari troops to replace its own. Further, it had publicly stated it would arm and train any group willing to remove the regime in Khartoum. It had characterized the regime in Somalia as a puppet regime and was arming Al-Shabaab to further destabilize that country. The problem was not a lack of communication, but one of attitude, resulting from a certain clique in Asmara that had never grown up from a rebel group. It was also a problem of lawlessness.

Appealing to the Council to act, he said an absence of action would imply that the countries in the region were on their own and must defend themselves. That was not a choice they wished to make. IGAD had been actively involved in the current resolution before the Council, and while he was personally disappointed that much of the “teeth of the resolution” had been removed, the text would still convey the right message. “We ask you to act, and to act decisively,” he concluded.

MOSES WETANGULA, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Kenya, said the Council must focus its sharp attention on Eritrea. Serious peace and security challenges plagued the region. IGADhad been a committed player in addressing those issues. He regretted that Eritrea continued to engage in hostile activities. As it stood, the region was not coming to the Council for the first time. The Council was already seized of the matter; he was asking it to enforce a sentence that had already been passed on an offending party.

Kenya had suffered from those hostile activities, he said, including attacks on tourist areas, kidnappings committed by Al-Shabaab and other incidents. The result had been a statement by Eritrea saying that Al-Shabaab did not pose a significant threat to the region.

Efforts to clean up the Al-Shabaab menace were ongoing even as Eritrea was supplying arms to the group, he said. Two or three years ago, Kenya had expelled an Eritrean diplomat on proof that the individual had been involved in arms transfers to Mogadishu. Kenya had suffered from other actions, including an explosion in a refugee camp that killed one police officer and injured civilians. Normally, after such incidents, Al-Shabaab issued statements, among them, a claim that the skyscrapers of Nairobi were legitimate targets, he said.

It was now time for the Security Council to act on the resolution before it, presented by IGAD members. The text had been unanimously supported by all the countries, and he had no doubt that Council had the will, means and capacity to deal with the situation. A stable, right direction was a step towards peace and security in the region. “To fail to sanction Eritrea is to add a feather to the cap of impunity,” he said. That would not help the region in any way.

MULL SEBUJJAKATENDE, Ambassador of Uganda to the African Union, said his country remained committed to the decisions regarding the border dispute between Ethiopia and Eritrea. It hoped that the Council would respond to the request by IGAD to take action against those individuals found to be supporting Al-Shabaab and other terrorists in the Horn of Africa. Noting that Uganda had troops in Somalia, he said his Government hoped those would be able to do their job and return home safely.

Action on Draft Resolution

When the meeting resumed in the afternoon, ALFRED MOUNGARA MOUSSOTSI (Gabon) said the States of the Horn of Africa had drawn the Council’s attention to the destabilizing activities carried out by Eritrea. Despite appeals by the international community and the African Union, Eritrea had failed to comply with relevant Security Council resolutions. Thus, IGAD had requested new sanctions, emphasizing the need to lay down conditions for peace in the region.

In response to that urgent appeal, his country had felt it was necessary to co-sponsor the resolution, which, among other things, requested that Eritrea comply with it and other resolutions. He pointed out that operative paragraphs 9 through 13 related to economic issues, and he urged Council members to adopt the resolution. The text aimed to lead to peace and security in the region.

The Council then adopted resolution 2023 (2011) by a vote of 13 in favour to none against, with 2 abstentions (China, Russian Federation).

RAFF BUKUN-OLUWOLEONEMOLA (Nigeria) said his country had always approached sanctions with gravity. In 2004, as Chair of the African Union, Nigeria had brought Eritrea and Ethiopia together for talks. Beyond any sanctions, the opportunity for a political solution to challenges in the region should not be closed. The current state of tension would undermine peace and progress in the long term.

He said that comprehensive and lasting peace should be the goal, and he encouraged Eritrea to comply with all the provisions of the resolution. Just as the future of the region depended on political will, international support was also needed. The security of all States was intertwined, and more serious and concerted efforts should be deployed in the region.

MARK LYALL GRANT (United Kingdom) expressed concern about Eritrea’s disruptive activities in Somalia and the region, and its non-compliance with previous Council resolutions, particularly resolution 1907 (2009). He underlined the Council’s readiness to consider additional measures in the event of further non-compliance. He urged Eritrea to comply with this and all other Council resolutions, and he urged all States in the region to end conflict, demarcate borders and work together to find peaceful solutions and protect civilians, with the aim of delivering peace and security. As today’s resolution stipulated, the Secretary-General and the Council would keep Eritrea’s actions under continuous review, adjusting them in light of its compliance or non-compliance.

PETER WITTIG (Germany) said the situation in the Horn of Africa had led to the adoption of resolution 1907 (2009), which established sanctions that had never been an end unto themselves. Nor were they meant to punish Eritrea. Unfortunately, however, Eritrea had failed to comply, and Germany was concerned that Eritrea continued to support armed opposition groups, particularly in Somalia. Moreover, Eritrea continued on a path to self-isolation. The Council and the Sanctions Committee had discussed at length and in depth the scope of a reinforced sanctions regime. The present text had in mind the fate of the Eritrean people. It was calibrated and did not impose new economic sanctions. Nor did it increase the burden on the Eritrean people. It demanded further transparency from Eritrea, which must stop all activities that destabilized the region. He called on the neighbouring countries to cooperate in good faith with Eritrea. At the same time, IGAD should swiftly decide on Eritrea’s request to reactivate is membership.

DOCTOR MASHABANE (South Africa) said instability had resulted in a humanitarian crisis in the region. He condemned any acts by Eritrea that led to destabilization. Resolution 1907 (2009) had been adopted to address that. He hoped the additional measures contained in the present resolution would not adversely affect the people of Eritrea.

He called on the Monitoring Group to follow its mandate and closely guard its independence in the work it did to assist the Council. He welcomed Eritrea’s desire to rejoin IGAD. The current resolution should complement the political process, which would ensure lasting peace in the region. The African Union had committed itself to assist countries to resolve problems, and he called on all parties to work with the African Union to reach a solution.

He was disappointed that Eritrea was not afforded the same opportunity to address the Council along with others in the morning. He had voted in favour of the resolution with a hope that it would help to address the challenges in the region.

LI BAODONG ( China) said his country understood the security situation in the region. He supported the settlement of African issues by African ways and by Africans, and hoped the African Union played a positive role in this issue. In that regard, China would continue to do its best to offer assistance.

Adopting a prudent view of sanctions in general, he said, China believed such restrictions could affect people’s livelihoods. For that reason, China had abstained in the vote on a similar resolution in 2009. Settlement of disputes between parties through dialogue was a principle that had led to China’s active part in drafting the current resolution. However, he believed there was room for improvement. Regrettably, the rush to vote on the text had resulted in its ultimate failure to reflect the legitimate concerns of Council members, including China’s. The Council’s Sanctions Committee should further explore the issue. Based on the above points, China had abstained in the vote on the current resolution.

NAWAF SALAM (Lebanon) reasserted the principles of State sovereignty and non-interference. He underlined the Djibouti Agreement and the Kampala Accord of 9 June, as well as the road map agreed on 6 September. He expressed satisfaction with Qatar’s efforts to help resolve the border conflict between Djibouti and Eritrea, and he called for continuing efforts to achieve the Council’s objectives, particularly the issues of boundaries and prisoners of war. Lebanon was concerned with the findings of the Monitoring Group as expressed in its July report, as well as Eritrea’s continued pursuit of efforts to destabilize the region. Thus, it supported the resolution, which provided a clear message on the need to implement all Council resolutions and to address all issues through dialogue to ensure stability in the Horn of Africa.

SUSAN RICE (United States) said resolution 2023 (2011) extended a message to Eritrea that it must cease all action threatening peace and security in Africa. Recalling events leading to today’s adoption, she noted that two years ago, the Council had adopted resolution 1907 (2009) in response to Eritrea’s continued arming of groups in Somalia. Targeted sanctions had been imposed, but the Council had continually received evidence that Eritrea supported armed groups in the region, and had not resolved its border dispute with Ethiopia. Additionally, the Monitoring Group had provided evidence of an “appalling” planned attack on the January 2011 African Union Summit.

She said that, according to the Monitoring Group, Eritrea was funding its activities through its diaspora tax. The Council had responded by imposing tougher sanctions that showed Eritrea that it would pay an ever higher price for its actions. The Council was also concerned by the use of mining funds to finance violations of sanctions. The guidelines called for in the text would provide best practices to help countries protect themselves from unintentionally contributing to Eritrea’s violations.

The resolution provided further opportunity for Eritrea to show its good faith, including through releasing information on the status of Djiboutian combatants missing since June 2008, she said. Eritrea must also cease all activities to destabilize the region and to support armed groups in the Horn of Africa. The United States hoped the text would convince Eritrea to reorder its priorities.

She said that Eritrea must confirm through its actions that it was ready to re-emerge as a law-abiding State. Until that time, the Council was committed to robustly implement the sanctions it had applied. She hoped Eritrea would not squander that chance.

GÉRARDARAUD (France) said that two years ago, the Council had adopted resolution 1907 (2009), following which the Eritrean authorities had failed to meet the Council’s expectations. The most recent Sanctions Committee report showed that Eritrea had continued to destabilize the region. In addition, it had done nothing to resolve border issues with Djibouti or to address reports on prisoners of war.

He said the current sanctions were without impact on the Eritrean population. In addition, the sanctions that had been decided upon could be reversed. He called upon Eritrea to commit itself to putting an end to its destabilizing activities.

Council President VITALY CHURKIN (Russian Federation), speaking in his national capacity, said his country had abstained in the vote on the current resolution, even though he understood the many concerns expressed today by IGAD member States. Russia was categorically against terrorism in all its forms. However, regarding certain reported incidents, the Security Council had not been presented with proof of the perpetrators of the reported attack. When it came to guiding the Security Council, he said guidance should be given by the resolution, and not by another body, which could lead to different interpretations of the text.

His concerns about the current resolution included the issue of the diaspora, as well as the inclusion of phrases that could have double meanings. Diplomatic work needed to be done and broad and multifaceted dialogue was needed to establish peace in the region. He called on all parties in the region to conduct such a dialogue to move towards a settlement of the issues.

Security Council expands sanctions on Eritrea over support for armed groups

Security Council in session

5 December 2011 –

The Security Council today placed additional sanctions on Eritrea for continuing to provide support to armed groups seeking to destabilize Somalia and other parts of the Horn of Africa, building on the arms and travel embargoes it imposed exactly two years ago.The new measures are contained in a resolution which received the support of 13 of the Council’s 15 members. China and Russia abstained. It follows an earlier meeting today at which the Council heard a briefing from the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD).
The Council expressed its grave concern in the text that “Eritrea has continued to provide political, financial, training and logistical support to armed opposition groups, including Al-Shabaab, engaged in undermining peace, security and stability in Somalia and the region.”It also condemned the planned terrorist attack of January 2011 to disrupt the African Union summit in Addis Ababa, as expressed by the findings of the Somalia/Eritrea Monitoring Group in July.
It also condemned the planned terrorist attack of January 2011 to disrupt the African Union summit in Addis Ababa, as expressed by the findings of the Somalia/Eritrea Monitoring Group in July.
The group found that the Eritrean Government “conceived, planned, organized and directed a failed plot” to disrupt the summit by bombing a series of civilian and governmental targets.
In December 2009, the Council adopted a resolution which imposed sanctions on Eritrea for supporting insurgents trying to topple the government in nearby Somalia. The measures included an arms embargo on Eritrea, travel bans on the country’s top political and military officials, and the freezing of assets of some of its senior political and military officials.
By today’s text, which was sponsored by Gabon and Nigeria, the Council condemned Eritrea’s violations of earlier resolutions.
It demanded that it “cease all direct or indirect efforts to destabilize States,” including through financial, military, intelligence and non-military assistance, such as the provision of training centres and camps for armed groups, passports, living expenses, or travel facilitation.
The Council also voiced concern at the potential use of the Eritrean mining sector as a source of finance to destabilize the Horn of Africa. It decided that States should take measures to ensure that their companies involved in mining in Eritrea exercise “due diligence” so that funds derived from the sector are not used to destabilize the region.
In addition, the Council called on Eritrea to engage constructively with Djibouti to resolve their border dispute.

UNITED NATIONS - The U.N. Security Council responded to appeals from east African leaders on Monday and approved tighter sanctions on Eritrea, which is accused of funding and arming terrorist groups in the volatile region.

The resolution was approved by a vote of 13-0, with Russia and China abstaining. Both countries are traditionally reluctant to impose sanctions.

Earlier on Monday, the leaders of Djibouti, Ethiopia and Somalia, along with senior officials from Kenya and Uganda, addressed the council by video conference from Addis Ababa and urged members to adopt a resolution strengthening sanctions imposed in 2009.

The resolution condemned Eritrea for violating the sanctions, which include an arms embargo, by continuing to support the Somali militant group al-Shabab and other opposition fighters. It demands that the government stop assisting armed groups trying to destabilize other countries in the region.

It called on all countries to exercise "vigilance" to prevent any diversions of funds from Eritrea's mining sector — a key source of income — to destabilize the Horn of Africa region in violation of sanctions.

It also condemned the "diaspora tax" that the Eritrean government imposes on remittances from its nationals overseas and allegedly uses to fund armed opposition groups.

Eritrean President Isaias Afwerki had asked to address the council in October, when a draft resolution was first circulated by Gabon and Nigeria. The draft was watered down, and the council didn't issue an invitation to Isaias to come to New York until late last week, when it scheduled a vote on the revised resolution for Monday afternoon.

In two letters to the Security Council this weekend, Eritrea's Foreign Minister Osman Saleh said it was not "humanly possible" for the president to get to New York so quickly, and he accused members of rushing a vote. He blamed the United States for obstructing Isaias' initial request to address the council, which prevented him from having any influence on deliberations on the text.

U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice said the Eritreans applied on Friday morning for 13 visas to come to the U.S. and that they were granted Saturday morning.

"They had ample time to be here," she said. "We have no explanation for their not being here except that they perhaps didn't like what was going to happen today."

U.N. experts monitoring the sanctions reported in July that Eritrea was continuing to provide support to al-Shabab — a view echoed by Somalia's President Sheik Sharif Sheik Ahmed.

"The regime in Eritrea insists on terrorizing my people," he told the council, accusing the Eritrean government of giving political, logistical and financial support to al-Shabab and al Qaeda militants.

The U.N. experts also blamed Eritrea for January's planned terrorist attack on the African Union summit in Addis Ababa, which Monday's resolution condemned.

The Inter Governmental Authority for Development, known as IGAD, which groups seven East African countries, had called in July for more sanctions to hit the Eritrean mining sector and remittances.

But council diplomats said new sanctions were watered down because of opposition from Russia and China as well as some European countries and the U.S., which felt the measures could hurt the Eritrean people.

Ethiopia's Prime Minister Meles Zenawi, whose country has a border dispute with Eritrea, insisted that "this is not a family quarrel" between the two countries, but an attempt to address the fact that "Eritrea is a prime source of instability for the whole region."

Meles, who heads IGAD, said he was "personally disappointed that much of the teeth of this resolution has been removed" but he said the current text still sends a message that Eritrea cannot continue to destabilize the region without consequences.
---------

REGIME AGAINST ERITREA ‘CALIBRATED’ TO HALT ALL ACTIVITIES DESTABILIZING REGION

Concerned at the potential use of the Eritrean mining sector as a financial source to destabilize the Horn of Africa region, the Security Council today reinforced the sanctions regime on that country to prevent mining funds from contributing to its continued violations of those measures.

Adopting resolution 2023 (2011), under Chapter VII of the Charter, by a vote of 13 in favour to none against, with 2 abstentions (China, Russian Federation), the Council demanded that Eritrea cease all direct or indirect efforts to destabilize States, and decided that States shall “undertake appropriate measures to promote the exercise of vigilance” in business dealings with Eritrea’s mining sector. To that end, it requested its Sanctions Committee concerning Somalia and Eritrea to draft, with the assistance of the Somalia/Eritrea Monitoring Group, due diligence guidelines for States’ optional use.

The Council also condemned Eritrea’s use of the “diaspora tax” on the Eritrean diaspora to destabilize the Horn of Africa region and to violate the sanctions regime, including by procuring arms and related materiel for transfer to armed opposition groups, and decided that Eritrea shall cease those practices. It further decided that Eritrea shall stop using extortion, threats of violence, fraud and other illicit means to collect taxes outside of Eritrea from its nationals or other individuals of Eritrean descent.

By further terms of the text, the Council expressed its intention to apply targeted sanctions against individuals and entities that meet the listing criteria set out in paragraph 15 of resolution 1907 (2009) and paragraph 1 of resolution 2002 (2011). [Together, those resolutions imposed an arms embargo, as well as a travel ban and assets freeze on Eritrea’s political and military leaders, and expanded the sanctions regime to include individuals and entities recruiting or using child soldiers in Somalia’s armed conflicts, and targeting civilians or committing attacks against schools and hospitals.]

By today’s text, the Council also decided to expand the mandate of the Monitoring Group to monitor and report on the provisions of the new text, as well as its demand that Eritrea make available information regarding the Djiboutian combatants missing in action since 10 to 12 June 2008.

It called on all States to report within 120 days on steps taken to implement the current resolution and on the Secretary-General to report within 180 days on Eritrea’s compliance under the sanctions regime. It affirmed that it would keep Eritrea’s actions under continuous review and that it was prepared to strengthen, modify or lift those sanctions based on the country’s compliance.

Speaking as Chair of the Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD) by videoconference from Addis Ababa, hours before the Council took action, MelesZenawi, Prime Minister of Ethiopia, said the member States of IGAD had gathered to express the same opinion, namely that “Eritrea is a prime source of instability for the whole region”. IGAD had been actively involved in drafting the text, which was tabled by Gabon and Nigeria, he said, and a failure by the Council to adopt it would imply that the countries in the region were on their own, and must defend themselves. That was not a choice they wished to make. “We ask you to act, and to act decisively,” he stressed.

Also speaking before action this afternoon, Gabon’s representative said that in response to the urgent appeal by IGAD for new sanctions, his country had felt it was necessary to co-sponsor the resolution. Despite appeals by the international community and the African Union, Eritrea had failed to comply with relevant Security Council resolutions. Urging the text’s adoption, he said it aimed to lead to peace and security in the region.

Nigeria’s representative, speaking after the text’s adoption, said that beyond any sanctions, the opportunity for a political solution to regional challenges should not be closed. A comprehensive and lasting peace must be the goal, and he encouraged Eritrea to comply with all of the resolution’s provisions. Just as the future of the region depended on political will, international support was also needed.

Explaining his delegation’s abstention, the representative of the Russian Federation said that although his Government understood the many concerns expressed by IGAD member States and was categorically opposed to terrorism, it believed the Council had not been presented with proof of the perpetrators of a reported attack on the African Union summit. Moreover, the Russian Federation opposed the inclusion in the resolution of the issue of the diaspora, as well as of phrases that could have double meanings. Diplomatic work, along with broad and multifaceted dialogue, was needed to establish peace in the region, and he called on all parties there to conduct such a dialogue to advance a settlement.

While China had actively participated in drafting the current resolution, that country’s ambassador said it had abstained in the vote based on its view that sanctions could affect people’s livelihoods and its assessment that the rush to vote on the text had resulted in its ultimate failure to reflect the legitimate concerns of Council members.

Germany’s ambassador stressed, however, that the Council and the Sanctions Committee had discussed at length and in depth the scope of a reinforced sanctions regime. The present text was calibrated and did not impose new economic sanctions. Nor did it increase the burden on the Eritrean people. It demanded further transparency from Eritrea, which must stop all activities that destabilized the region.

Stressing that the Monitoring Group had provided evidence of the “appalling” planned attack on the African Union summit, the representative of the United States said the resolution provided further opportunity for Eritrea to show its good faith. Indeed, Eritrea must confirm through its actions that it was ready to re-emerge as a law-abiding State, and the United States hoped Eritrea would not squander that chance.

Also speaking were the representatives of the United Kingdom, South Africa, Lebanon and France.

Also addressing the Council via video- and teleconference were Ismaël Omar Guelleh, President of Djibouti; Sheikh Sharif Sheikh Ahmed, President of the Transitional Federal Government of Somalia; Moses Wetangula, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Kenya; and Mull SebujjaKatende, Ambassador of Uganda to the African Union.

The meeting began at 10:10 a.m. and was suspended at 10:45 a.m., reconvening at 3:07 p.m. before concluding at 3:41 p.m.

Resolution

The full text of resolution 2023 (2011) reads as follows:

“The Security Council,

“Recalling its previous resolutions and statements of its President concerning the situation in Somalia and the border dispute between Djibouti and Eritrea, in particular its resolutions 751 (1992), 1844 (2008), 1862 (2009), 1907 (2009), 1916 (2009), 1998 (2011) and 2002 (2011), and its statements of 18 May 2009 (S/PRST/2009/15), 9 July 2009 (S/PRST/2009/19), and 12 June 2008 (S/PRST/2008/20),

“Reaffirming its respect for the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence and unity of Somalia, Djibouti and Eritrea, respectively, as well as that of all other States of the region,

“Reiterating its full support for the Djibouti Peace Process and the Transitional Federal Charter which provide the framework for reaching a lasting political solution in Somalia, and welcoming the Kampala Accord of 9 June 2011 and the road map agreed on 6 September 2011,

“Calling upon all States in the region to peacefully resolve their disputes and normalize their relations in order to lay the foundation for durable peace and lasting security in the Horn of Africa, and encouraging these States to provide the necessary cooperation to the African Union in its efforts to resolve these disputes,

“Reiterating its grave concern about the border dispute between Eritrea and Djibouti and the importance of resolving it, calling upon Eritrea to pursue with Djibouti, in good faith, the scrupulous implementation of the 6 June 2010 Agreement, concluded under the auspices of Qatar, in order to resolve their border dispute and consolidate the normalization of their relations, andwelcoming the mediation efforts of Qatar, and the continued engagement of regional actors, the African Union, and the United Nations,

“Noting the letter of the Permanent Representative of Djibouti to the United Nations of 6 October 2011 (S/2011/617) which informs the Secretary-General of the escape of two Djiboutian prisoners of war from an Eritrean prison, while noting that the Government of Eritrea has to this date denied detaining any Djiboutian prisoners of war,

“Expressing grave concern at the findings of the Somalia/Eritrea Monitoring Group report of 18 July 2011 (S/2011/433), that Eritrea has continued providing political, financial, training and logistical support to armed opposition groups, including Al-Shabaab, engaged in undermining peace, security and stability in Somalia and the region,

“Condemning the planned terrorist attack of January 2011 to disrupt the African Union summit in Addis Ababa, as expressed by the findings of the Somalia/Eritrea Monitoring Group report,

“Taking note of the Decision of the African Union Assembly of Heads of State and Government held in January 2010 and the Communiqué of the AU Peace and Security Council held on 8 January 2010, welcoming the adoption, by the United Nations (UN) Security Council on 23 December 2009 of resolution 1907 (2009), which imposes sanctions on Eritrea, for, among other things, providing political, financial and logistical support to armed groups engaged in undermining peace and reconciliation in Somalia and regional stability; stressing the need to pursue vigorously the effective implementation of resolution 1907 (2009), and expressing its intention to apply targeted sanctions against individuals and entities if they meet the listing criteria set out in paragraph 15 of resolution 1907 (2009) and paragraph 8 of resolution 1844 (2008),

“Noting the decision by the 18th Extraordinary Session of the Assembly of the Heads of State and Government of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), calling on the Security Council to take measures to ensure that Eritrea desists from its destabilization activities in the Horn of Africa,

“Noting the letter from Eritrea (S/2011/652), containing a document responding to the report of Somalia/Eritrea Monitoring Group,

“Strongly condemning any acts by Eritrea that undermine peace, security and stability in the region and calling on all Member States to comply fully with the terms of the arms embargo imposed by paragraph 5 of resolution 733 (1992), as elaborated and amended by subsequent resolutions,

“Determining that Eritrea’s failure to fully comply with resolutions 1844 (2008), 1862 (2009) and 1907 (2009) and its actions undermining peace and reconciliation in Somalia and the Horn of Africa region, as well as the dispute between Djibouti and Eritrea constitute a threat to international peace and security,

“Mindful of its primary responsibility under the Charter of the United Nations for the maintenance of international peace and security,

“Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,

“1. Condemns the violations by Eritrea of Security Council resolutions 1907 (2009), 1862 (2009) and 1844 (2008) by providing continued support to armed opposition groups, including Al-Shabaab, engaged in undermining peace and reconciliation in Somalia and the region;

“2. Supports the call by the African Union for Eritrea to resolve its border disputes with its neighbours and calls on the parties to peacefully resolve their disputes, normalize their relations and to promote durable peace and lasting security in the Horn of Africa, and encourages the parties to provide the necessary cooperation to the African Union in its efforts to resolve these disputes;

“3. Reiterates that all Member States, including Eritrea, shall comply fully with the terms of the arms embargo imposed by paragraph 5 of resolution 733 (1992), as elaborated and amended by subsequent resolutions;

“4. Reiterates that Eritrea shall fully comply with resolution 1907 (2009) without any further delay and stresses the obligation of all States to comply with the measures imposed by resolution 1907 (2009);

“5. Notes Eritrea’s withdrawal of its forces following the stationing of Qatari observers in the disputed areas along the border with Djibouti, calls upon Eritrea to engage constructively with Djibouti to resolve the border dispute, and reaffirms its intention to take further targeted measures against those who obstruct implementation of resolution 1862 (2009);

“6. Demands that Eritrea shall make available information pertaining to Djiboutian combatants missing in action since the clashes of 10 to 12 June 2008 so that those concerned may ascertain the presence and condition of Djiboutian prisoners of war;

“7. Demands Eritrea to cease all direct or indirect efforts to destabilize States, including through financial, military, intelligence and non-military assistance, such as the provision of training centres, camps and other similar facilities for armed groups, passports, living expenses, or travel facilitation;

“8. Calls upon all States, in particular States of the region, in order to ensure strict implementation of the arms embargo established by paragraphs 5 and 6 of resolution 1907 (2009), to inspect in their territory, including seaports and airports, in accordance with the national authorities and legislation and consistent with international law, all cargo bound to or from Eritrea, if the State concerned has information that provides reasonable grounds to believe that the cargo contains items the supply, sale, transfer or export of which is prohibited by paragraphs 5 or 6 of resolution 1907 (2009), and recalls the obligations contained in paragraphs 8 and 9 of resolution 1907 (2009) with respect to the discovery of items prohibited by paragraphs 5 or 6 of resolution 1907 (2009) and paragraph 5 of resolution 733 (1992) as elaborated and amended by subsequent resolutions;

“9. Expresses its intention to apply targeted sanctions against individuals and entities if they meet the listing criteria set out in paragraph 15 of resolution 1907 (2009) and paragraph 1 of resolution 2002 (2011) and requests the Committee to review, as a matter of urgency, listing proposals from Member States;

“10. Condemns the use of the ‘Diaspora tax’ on Eritrean diaspora by the Eritrean Government to destabilize the Horn of Africa region or violate relevant resolutions, including 1844 (2008), 1862 (2009) and 1907 (2009), including for purposes such as procuring arms and related materiel for transfer to armed opposition groups or providing any services or financial transfers provided directly or indirectly to such groups, as outlined in the findings of the Somalia/Eritrea Monitoring Group in its 18 July 2011 report (S/2011/433), and decides that Eritrea shall cease these practices;

“11. Decides that Eritrea shall cease using extortion, threats of violence, fraud and other illicit means to collect taxes outside of Eritrea from its nationals or other individuals of Eritrean descent, decides further that States shall undertake appropriate measures to hold accountable, consistent with international law, those individuals on their territory who are acting, officially or unofficially, on behalf of the Eritrean Government or the PFDJ contrary to the prohibitions imposed in this paragraph and the laws of the States concerned, and calls upon States to take such action as may be appropriate consistent with their domestic law and international relevant instruments, including the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations and the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, to prevent such individuals from facilitating further violations;

“12. Expresses concern at the potential use of the Eritrean mining sector as a financial source to destabilize the Horn of Africa region, as outlined in the Final Report of the Monitoring Group (S/2011/433), and calls on Eritrea to show transparency in its public finances, including through cooperation with the Monitoring Group, in order to demonstrate that the proceeds of these mining activities are not being used to violate relevant resolutions, including 1844 (2008), 1862 (2009), 1907 (2009) and this resolution;

“13. Decides that States, in order to prevent funds derived from the mining sector of Eritrea contributing to violations of resolutions 1844 (2008), 1862 (2009), 1907 (2009) or this resolution, shall undertake appropriate measures to promote the exercise of vigilance by their nationals, persons subject to their jurisdiction and firms incorporated in their territory or subject to their jurisdiction that are doing business in this sector in Eritrea including through the issuance of due diligence guidelines, and requests in this regard the Committee, with the assistance of the Monitoring Group, to draft guidelines for the optional use of Member States;

“14. Urges all States to introduce due diligence guidelines to prevent the provision of financial services, including insurance or re-insurance, or the transfer to, through, or from their territory, or to or by their nationals or entities organized under their laws (including branches abroad), or persons or financial institutions in their territory, of any financial or other assets or resources if such services, assets or resources, including new investment in the extractives sector, would contribute to Eritrea’s violation of relevant resolutions, including 1844 (2008), 1862 (2009), 1907 (2009) and this resolution;

“15. Calls upon all States to report to the Security Council within 120 days on steps taken to implement the provisions of this resolution;

“16. Decides to further expand the mandate of the Monitoring Group re‑established by resolution 2002 (2011) to monitor and report on implementation of the measures imposed in this resolution and undertake the tasks outlined below:

(a) Assist the Committee in monitoring the implementation of the measures imposed in paragraphs 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 above, including by reporting any information on violations;

(b) Consider any information relevant to paragraph 6 above that should be brought to the attention of the Committee;

“17. Urges all States, relevant United Nations bodies and other interested parties to cooperate fully with the Committee and the Monitoring Group, including by supplying any information at their disposal on the implementation of the measures decided in resolution 1844 (2008), resolution 1907 (2009) and this resolution, in particular incidents of non-compliance;

“18. Affirms that it shall keep Eritrea’s actions under continuous review and that it shall be prepared to adjust the measures, including through their strengthening, modification or lifting, in light of Eritrea’s compliance with the provisions of resolutions 1844 (2008), 1862 (2009), 1907 (2009) and this resolution;

“19. Requests the Secretary-General to report within 180 days on Eritrea’s compliance with the provisions of resolutions 1844 (2008), 1862 (2009), 1907 (2009) and this resolution;

“20. Decides to remain seized of the matter.”

Background

The Security Council met to consider peace and security in Africa, for which it was joined in the morning by a number of speakers via video- and teleconference.

Statements

ISMAËL OMAR GUELLEH, President of Djibouti, said that since the beginning of its aggressions against his country, Eritrea had long ignored efforts to resolve the dispute in a responsible manner. The people of Djibouti had welcomed the mediation accord signed in 2010 under the auspices of Qatar. But, unfortunately, the signing of that accord had not changed the views of Eritrea, which flagrantly continued its kidnapping and forced recruitment of young Djiboutians, who returned to the north to perpetrate terrorist attacks in Djibouti. His Government would never allow the Eritrean regime to carry out such attacks and, to that end, it had arrested rebels who were trained and sent by Eritrea to conduct such attacks. Weapons sent by the Eritrean regime had also been intercepted and that information had been conveyed to the Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD), as well as to the United Nations.

Continuing, he said that, despite article 3 of the mediation accord, which stipulated that all parties would make available information on the 19 disappeared soldiers being held in Eritrea, that country still had not done so. For its part, Djibouti had sought to meet the accord’s requirements by inviting the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to meet with deserted soldiers from Eritrea. Although two of the Djiboutian soldiers, who had been held since June 2008, had escaped from a detention camp in Eritrea, news of the other 17 soldiers was unavailable. He called for their immediate release without condition.

In addition to promoting regional instability, Eritrea threatened international peace and security, he stressed. Shirking sanctions, Eritrea had chosen to flout calls by the Council and regional organizations to change its behaviour. He called on Council members to support the resolution presented today on behalf of IGAD’s members. The present text was necessary because the previous resolutions and sanctions did not seem to contain Eritrea’s actions.

SHEIKH SHARIF SHEIKH AHMED, President of the Transitional Federal Government of Somalia, said his people had been suffering from terrorism. His Government had tried to reconcile with those groups, but interference by the Eritrean authorities had prevented that. Al‑Shabaab and Al-Qaida had the support of the Eritrean Government by sea, land and air. The Eritrean regime had the ability to deliver assistance to Al-Shabaab from Eritrea to Somalia.

He said that although Somalia had no direct borders with Eritrea or a history of bad relations, current circumstances had caused much suffering in his country from the actions of Al-Shabaab. He had tried to resolve problems with Eritrea, including with common friends, such as the late Muammar Qadhafi, who had called upon them to leave Somalia and reconcile. That proposition had been rejected. Mr. Ahmed said he had also attended a Sahel country meeting. Eritrea had not. He had called on Mr. Qadhafi to convince the Eritrean President not to intervene in Somalia. That request had also been rejected. Embassies in Kenya and elsewhere were aware of financial transactions and of military advisers being sent to Somalia to conduct training and attacking African Union forces.

The regime in Eritrea had insisted on terrorizing the Somali people, and diplomatic talks had been rejected, he said. While he truly regretted the plight of the Eritrean people, the interests of his country and his neighbours were being harmed. IGAD did not usually meet in the absence of a member State unless the situation was dire. It currently was.

MELESZENAWI, Prime Minister of Ethiopia, also speaking as Chair of the Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD), said that as a region, the countries addressing the Council today were not complaining about the domestic policies of the Eritrean Government. They might or might not like those policies, but that was a domestic matter. Nor was it a “family quarrel” between Ethiopia and Eritrea. All member States of IGAD had gathered to express the same opinion, namely that “Eritrea is a prime source of instability for the whole region”.

Of course, he said, Ethiopia also had a problem with Eritrea, which, according to the assessment of an independent panel, had started when Eritrea had invaded Ethiopia. Nevertheless, the 2002 delimitation decision had been accepted by Ethiopia without preconditions. His Government might not like the decision, but it had made clear that it accepted it unconditionally. The demarcation of boundaries on maps was a fiction, and Ethiopia was asking Eritrea to engage in dialogue in order to move towards demarcation, just as Nigeria and Cameroon had. “This is what grown-ups do,” he said.

He said Eritrea had invaded islands held by Yemen before it had invaded Ethiopia. It had also invaded Djibouti, first denying it had done so, and then admitting it had by withdrawing and allowing Qatari troops to replace its own. Further, it had publicly stated it would arm and train any group willing to remove the regime in Khartoum. It had characterized the regime in Somalia as a puppet regime and was arming Al-Shabaab to further destabilize that country. The problem was not a lack of communication, but one of attitude, resulting from a certain clique in Asmara that had never grown up from a rebel group. It was also a problem of lawlessness.

Appealing to the Council to act, he said an absence of action would imply that the countries in the region were on their own and must defend themselves. That was not a choice they wished to make. IGAD had been actively involved in the current resolution before the Council, and while he was personally disappointed that much of the “teeth of the resolution” had been removed, the text would still convey the right message. “We ask you to act, and to act decisively,” he concluded.

MOSES WETANGULA, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Kenya, said the Council must focus its sharp attention on Eritrea. Serious peace and security challenges plagued the region. IGADhad been a committed player in addressing those issues. He regretted that Eritrea continued to engage in hostile activities. As it stood, the region was not coming to the Council for the first time. The Council was already seized of the matter; he was asking it to enforce a sentence that had already been passed on an offending party.

Kenya had suffered from those hostile activities, he said, including attacks on tourist areas, kidnappings committed by Al-Shabaab and other incidents. The result had been a statement by Eritrea saying that Al-Shabaab did not pose a significant threat to the region.

Efforts to clean up the Al-Shabaab menace were ongoing even as Eritrea was supplying arms to the group, he said. Two or three years ago, Kenya had expelled an Eritrean diplomat on proof that the individual had been involved in arms transfers to Mogadishu. Kenya had suffered from other actions, including an explosion in a refugee camp that killed one police officer and injured civilians. Normally, after such incidents, Al-Shabaab issued statements, among them, a claim that the skyscrapers of Nairobi were legitimate targets, he said.

It was now time for the Security Council to act on the resolution before it, presented by IGAD members. The text had been unanimously supported by all the countries, and he had no doubt that Council had the will, means and capacity to deal with the situation. A stable, right direction was a step towards peace and security in the region. “To fail to sanction Eritrea is to add a feather to the cap of impunity,” he said. That would not help the region in any way.

MULL SEBUJJAKATENDE, Ambassador of Uganda to the African Union, said his country remained committed to the decisions regarding the border dispute between Ethiopia and Eritrea. It hoped that the Council would respond to the request by IGAD to take action against those individuals found to be supporting Al-Shabaab and other terrorists in the Horn of Africa. Noting that Uganda had troops in Somalia, he said his Government hoped those would be able to do their job and return home safely.

Action on Draft Resolution

When the meeting resumed in the afternoon, ALFRED MOUNGARA MOUSSOTSI (Gabon) said the States of the Horn of Africa had drawn the Council’s attention to the destabilizing activities carried out by Eritrea. Despite appeals by the international community and the African Union, Eritrea had failed to comply with relevant Security Council resolutions. Thus, IGAD had requested new sanctions, emphasizing the need to lay down conditions for peace in the region.

In response to that urgent appeal, his country had felt it was necessary to co-sponsor the resolution, which, among other things, requested that Eritrea comply with it and other resolutions. He pointed out that operative paragraphs 9 through 13 related to economic issues, and he urged Council members to adopt the resolution. The text aimed to lead to peace and security in the region.

The Council then adopted resolution 2023 (2011) by a vote of 13 in favour to none against, with 2 abstentions (China, Russian Federation).

RAFF BUKUN-OLUWOLEONEMOLA (Nigeria) said his country had always approached sanctions with gravity. In 2004, as Chair of the African Union, Nigeria had brought Eritrea and Ethiopia together for talks. Beyond any sanctions, the opportunity for a political solution to challenges in the region should not be closed. The current state of tension would undermine peace and progress in the long term.

He said that comprehensive and lasting peace should be the goal, and he encouraged Eritrea to comply with all the provisions of the resolution. Just as the future of the region depended on political will, international support was also needed. The security of all States was intertwined, and more serious and concerted efforts should be deployed in the region.

MARK LYALL GRANT (United Kingdom) expressed concern about Eritrea’s disruptive activities in Somalia and the region, and its non-compliance with previous Council resolutions, particularly resolution 1907 (2009). He underlined the Council’s readiness to consider additional measures in the event of further non-compliance. He urged Eritrea to comply with this and all other Council resolutions, and he urged all States in the region to end conflict, demarcate borders and work together to find peaceful solutions and protect civilians, with the aim of delivering peace and security. As today’s resolution stipulated, the Secretary-General and the Council would keep Eritrea’s actions under continuous review, adjusting them in light of its compliance or non-compliance.

PETER WITTIG (Germany) said the situation in the Horn of Africa had led to the adoption of resolution 1907 (2009), which established sanctions that had never been an end unto themselves. Nor were they meant to punish Eritrea. Unfortunately, however, Eritrea had failed to comply, and Germany was concerned that Eritrea continued to support armed opposition groups, particularly in Somalia. Moreover, Eritrea continued on a path to self-isolation. The Council and the Sanctions Committee had discussed at length and in depth the scope of a reinforced sanctions regime. The present text had in mind the fate of the Eritrean people. It was calibrated and did not impose new economic sanctions. Nor did it increase the burden on the Eritrean people. It demanded further transparency from Eritrea, which must stop all activities that destabilized the region. He called on the neighbouring countries to cooperate in good faith with Eritrea. At the same time, IGAD should swiftly decide on Eritrea’s request to reactivate is membership.

DOCTOR MASHABANE (South Africa) said instability had resulted in a humanitarian crisis in the region. He condemned any acts by Eritrea that led to destabilization. Resolution 1907 (2009) had been adopted to address that. He hoped the additional measures contained in the present resolution would not adversely affect the people of Eritrea.

He called on the Monitoring Group to follow its mandate and closely guard its independence in the work it did to assist the Council. He welcomed Eritrea’s desire to rejoin IGAD. The current resolution should complement the political process, which would ensure lasting peace in the region. The African Union had committed itself to assist countries to resolve problems, and he called on all parties to work with the African Union to reach a solution.

He was disappointed that Eritrea was not afforded the same opportunity to address the Council along with others in the morning. He had voted in favour of the resolution with a hope that it would help to address the challenges in the region.

LI BAODONG ( China) said his country understood the security situation in the region. He supported the settlement of African issues by African ways and by Africans, and hoped the African Union played a positive role in this issue. In that regard, China would continue to do its best to offer assistance.

Adopting a prudent view of sanctions in general, he said, China believed such restrictions could affect people’s livelihoods. For that reason, China had abstained in the vote on a similar resolution in 2009. Settlement of disputes between parties through dialogue was a principle that had led to China’s active part in drafting the current resolution. However, he believed there was room for improvement. Regrettably, the rush to vote on the text had resulted in its ultimate failure to reflect the legitimate concerns of Council members, including China’s. The Council’s Sanctions Committee should further explore the issue. Based on the above points, China had abstained in the vote on the current resolution.

NAWAF SALAM (Lebanon) reasserted the principles of State sovereignty and non-interference. He underlined the Djibouti Agreement and the Kampala Accord of 9 June, as well as the road map agreed on 6 September. He expressed satisfaction with Qatar’s efforts to help resolve the border conflict between Djibouti and Eritrea, and he called for continuing efforts to achieve the Council’s objectives, particularly the issues of boundaries and prisoners of war. Lebanon was concerned with the findings of the Monitoring Group as expressed in its July report, as well as Eritrea’s continued pursuit of efforts to destabilize the region. Thus, it supported the resolution, which provided a clear message on the need to implement all Council resolutions and to address all issues through dialogue to ensure stability in the Horn of Africa.

SUSAN RICE (United States) said resolution 2023 (2011) extended a message to Eritrea that it must cease all action threatening peace and security in Africa. Recalling events leading to today’s adoption, she noted that two years ago, the Council had adopted resolution 1907 (2009) in response to Eritrea’s continued arming of groups in Somalia. Targeted sanctions had been imposed, but the Council had continually received evidence that Eritrea supported armed groups in the region, and had not resolved its border dispute with Ethiopia. Additionally, the Monitoring Group had provided evidence of an “appalling” planned attack on the January 2011 African Union Summit.

She said that, according to the Monitoring Group, Eritrea was funding its activities through its diaspora tax. The Council had responded by imposing tougher sanctions that showed Eritrea that it would pay an ever higher price for its actions. The Council was also concerned by the use of mining funds to finance violations of sanctions. The guidelines called for in the text would provide best practices to help countries protect themselves from unintentionally contributing to Eritrea’s violations.

The resolution provided further opportunity for Eritrea to show its good faith, including through releasing information on the status of Djiboutian combatants missing since June 2008, she said. Eritrea must also cease all activities to destabilize the region and to support armed groups in the Horn of Africa. The United States hoped the text would convince Eritrea to reorder its priorities.

She said that Eritrea must confirm through its actions that it was ready to re-emerge as a law-abiding State. Until that time, the Council was committed to robustly implement the sanctions it had applied. She hoped Eritrea would not squander that chance.

GÉRARDARAUD (France) said that two years ago, the Council had adopted resolution 1907 (2009), following which the Eritrean authorities had failed to meet the Council’s expectations. The most recent Sanctions Committee report showed that Eritrea had continued to destabilize the region. In addition, it had done nothing to resolve border issues with Djibouti or to address reports on prisoners of war.

He said the current sanctions were without impact on the Eritrean population. In addition, the sanctions that had been decided upon could be reversed. He called upon Eritrea to commit itself to putting an end to its destabilizing activities.

Council President VITALY CHURKIN (Russian Federation), speaking in his national capacity, said his country had abstained in the vote on the current resolution, even though he understood the many concerns expressed today by IGAD member States. Russia was categorically against terrorism in all its forms. However, regarding certain reported incidents, the Security Council had not been presented with proof of the perpetrators of the reported attack. When it came to guiding the Security Council, he said guidance should be given by the resolution, and not by another body, which could lead to different interpretations of the text.

His concerns about the current resolution included the issue of the diaspora, as well as the inclusion of phrases that could have double meanings. Diplomatic work needed to be done and broad and multifaceted dialogue was needed to establish peace in the region. He called on all parties in the region to conduct such a dialogue to move towards a settlement of the issues.

Followers

About Me

Prof. Muse Tegegne has lectured sociology Change & Liberation in Europe, Africa and Americas. He has obtained Doctorat es Science from the University of Geneva. A PhD in Developmental Studies & ND in Natural Therapies. He wrote on the problematic of the Horn of Africa extensively. He Speaks Amharic, Tigergna, Hebrew, English, French. He has a good comprehension of Arabic, Spanish and Italian.